You are not logged in.
New problem:
Difficulty: Incredibly hard if you do it my way.
E poses another one:
From the set, S = {2,3,5,7,11,13}, numbers are picked with replacement until a run of 6 different numbers appears for the first time. What is the average number of picks?
Here is an example:
2,2,3,5,7,13,2,5,2,2,3,7,5,11,11,3,2,3,3,7,7,2,5,2,5,5,13,13,11,13,2,5,3,7,11,13
Here the answer is 36, because the 36th one completes the first run of 6 distinct numbers.
A says) How boring, why does she keep coming up with such easy ones? The answer is obviously 36.
B says) Maybe because you never get them right. It is a little more than 83.
C says) 36 is correct by simulation.
D says) 216 is the obvious answer.
E says) You are all wrong!
Who is right?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
Thanks!
Did you pick the question from that?
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
Yes, I was playing with it and wanted to see how much of the
method in the PDF I could remember. Took a couple of hours
before I could get his idea to work.
I had not looked at the markov chain idea so thanks for putting it
down. Thanks for looking at the problem.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
Okay.
Actually, I misunderstood it as a CCP and was about to answer that it's 14.7
What would be the probability that all different numbers have been picked consecutively after 83 guesses?
Is that P^83?
Last edited by gAr (2011-08-31 06:29:22)
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
that all different numbers
How could we get 83 in a row different? Do you mean 83 with no
run of 6?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
I meant to ask what is the probability that there's atleast one run of 6 different numbers in 83 guesses.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
I think I can answer that. Will post it as soon as I get it.
I start with a simulation which indicates a probability of about .632 that there will be 1 or more runs of 6 distinct in 83 picks.
Looks like to get the probability you just raise your matrix up to the 83 power and check the first row, last column.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
Thanks for verifying!
But feels a little strange that we expect a run of 6 different numbers in 83.2 picks, whereas the probability is only about 63%.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
Yes, that always bothered me too. One would think it
would be close to 1.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi,
Yes, I too thought like that!
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
At least as far as I can remember. The prob. has nver been less than .5
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
The prob. has nver been less than .5
In other problems?
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
That is what I meant. Have you ever seen a case where the prob was less than 1 / 2
for the expected number?
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Okay.
I haven't done many problems on expectation. I'll observe from now on.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
I have not done enough of them to answer that question. Now I think
that if we watch we will find some with a prob. less than .5
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Okay.
I'll look at some more expectation problems.
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
And good work with the matrix you came up with!
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
I started with a wrong matrix yesterday. After wasting a couple of hours with that, I carefully wrote it down with greater detail instead of guessing. Finally I was glad that it was correct!
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi;
It worked real nice. Fit the simulation to almost 3 decimal
places.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
I was trying a problem from chapter 4 in that file
3. If a die is rolled 100 times (say), what is the probability that all six sides have appeared at least one?
If a die is rolled 100 times (say), what is the probability that there is a run of 6 that has all six possible
faces? What about a run of 10 with all six faces at least once?
Isn't this the matrix for that
and one more:
4. A die is rolled repeatedly and summed. What is the expected number of rolls until the sum is:
(a) a prime? Experimentally it appears to be around 2.432211 (one million trials).
(b) a power of 2? Hmmmm...
(c) a multiple of n? The answer appears to be n.
For the part (c), I used an absorbing markov chain for a particular case of n=10.
Last edited by gAr (2011-09-01 05:33:23)
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
I will start to work on them.
3. If a die is rolled 100 times (say), what is the probability that all six sides have appeared at least one?
This one has such a small probability that in 10 000 000 trials it did not happen once.
If a die is rolled 100 times (say), what is the probability that there is a run of 6 that has all six possible
faces? What about a run of 10 with all six faces at least once?
These two can be answered with the matrix in post #1303
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Hi bobbym,
This one has such a small probability that in 10 000 000 trials it did not happen once.
Using the markov chain in my previous post,
the probability ≈ 0.999999927551959
These two can be answered with the matrix in post #1303
Oh, yes. I didn't see the word "run" there in the question.
So, question #3 was easy enough!
Did you try #4, (c)?
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense" - Buddha?
"Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay."
Offline
Hi gAr;
Using the markov chain in my previous post,
the probability ≈ 0.999999927551959
That might be right! The probability is so small that you need a large simulation to
get any at all. We can sort of check in another way.
I have not looked at the next one yet because I am still stuck on 3a.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline